A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF MAXIM FLOUTING PERFORMED BY THE MAIN CHARACTER IN PHILOMENA MOVIE.

Presented

ENGLIS

d as Partial Sast

SH LANG

ENG

F A CU

Y

Fulfillment tra Degree i

A

GUAGE A

GLISH ED

LTY OF

YOGYAKA

A THE of the Requ in English L

Ahmad Dzak 1021114

AND LITE

DUCATIO

F LAN GU

ARTA STA

201

ESIS uirements fo Language an ky Hasan 44018

ERATUR

ON DEPA

UAG ES

ATE UNIVE

5

or the Attain nd Literature

RE STUDY

ARTMEN

AND AR

ERSITY

nment of Sa e

Y PROGR

NT

R TS

arjana

RAM

        

DEDICATION

This thesis is dedicated to:

MOTTOS

“And whoever (is) patient and forgives, indeed, that (is) surely of matters of determination”

Al-Quran (42:43)

“Think of all the beauty still left around you and be happy.” Anne Frank

“You can, you should, and if you’re brave enough to start, you will.” Stephen King

             

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

All praise be to Allah SWT, the Almighty, for all the blessings without which the researcher would never have finished his thesis. In writing this thesis, the researcher received much support, assistance, guidance, love, and prayers from people. Therefore, he would like to give his gratitude to:

1. Drs. Suhaini Muhammad Saleh, M.A., his first supervisor, and Titik Sudartinah, S.S., M.A., his second supervisor, who have given him support, guidance, and care;

2. his parents, Ahmad Fachriza, S.H. and Ekawati, who have given him love, prayers, and support;

3. his sister and brother, Amirah Farah Fawziyyah and Muhammad Husain Ashiddiqy who have given him their love;

4. his lecturers in the English Education Department, who have given him valuable knowledge;

5. his friends, Wisnu Ngudi Arto, Arif Triwidiatmoko, all members of Sasing G and Linguistics class who have given him support; and

6. all people in his life whose names cannot be mentioned one by one who have given him support.

Th suggestion values to th

his thesis is ns and comm

he readers a

s not perfec ments to im and other res

ct. Therefor mprove this t

searchers.

re, the resea thesis. He h

Y

archer woul hopes that th

Yogyakarta, The R

Ahmad D

ld gladly w his thesis ca

19 January Researcher Dzaky Hasa welcome an give 2015 an

TABLE OF CONTENTS

     

TITLE……… i

APPROVAL SHEET……… ii

RATIFICATION SHEET………. iii

SURAT PERNYATAAN... iv

DEDICATION………. v

MOTTOS……….. vi

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT……… vii

TABLE OF CONTENTS……….. ix

LIST OF TABLES AND FIGURES……… xi

ABSTRACT………. xii

CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION A. Background of the Study………..………. 1

B. Research Focus …….……….…………..……...……... 3

C. Objective of the Study……….……….……… 5

D. Significance of the Study………..…… 5

CHAPTER II LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK A. Pragmatics………..………....…… 7

B. Cooperative Principle……….……….………….. 10

C. Philomena………...…...…..……… 26

D. Related Studies……….……… 29

E. Conceptual Framework……….……… 30

CHAPTER III RESEARCH METHOD

A. Types of Study………. 33

B. Research Instrument………. 33

C. Forms, Context, and Sources of the data……….………. 34

D. Techniques of Data Collection………..………… 34

E. Techniques of Data Analysis……… 34

F. Data Trustworthiness………..……….. 36

CHAPTER IV FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION A. Findings……….……….…….…….. 37

B. Discussions…..……….………. 40

1. Types of Maxim Flouting Performed by the Main Character in Philomena... 40 2. Strategies of Maxim Flouting Used by the Main Character in Philomena…..………..… 53 CHAPTER V CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS A. Conclusions……… 71

B. Suggestions……… 72

REFERENCES……… 74

APPENDICES………. 76

1. Data Sheet of Types and Strategies of Maxim Flouting Performed by the Main Character in Philomena…………...………...…….…….. 76 2. Surat Pernyataan Triangulasi………...……… 95

       

LIST OF FIGURES AND TABLES

Figure 1. DVD Cover of Philomena………. 26 Figure 2. Analytical Construct………. 32

Table 1. The Example of Data Sheet of Types and Strategies of Maxim Flouting Performed by the Main Character in Philomena……….. 35 Table 2. Frequency of Types and Strategies of Maxim Flouting performed by the Main Character in Philomena………...……… 38

A PRAGMATIC ANALYSIS OF MAXIM FLOUTING PERFORMED BY THE MAIN CHARACTER IN PHILOMENA MOVIE

Ahmad Dzaky Hasan 10211144018 ABSTRACT

Philomena is about Martin Sixsmith, a dismissed journalist, who helped Philomena Lee, an old Irish mother, to look for Anthony, her long-lost son. There are two objectives in this study; they are (1) to identify the types of maxim flouting performed by the main character in Philomena, and (2) to describe the strategies of maxim flouting used by the main character in Philomena.

In this research, pragmatic approach was applied by the researcher. Meanwhile, the type of study was qualitative-quantitative method. The researcher became the main instrument, supported by a data sheet, which was the secondary instrument. The form of the data was lingual units consisting of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. Meanwhile, dialogues became the context of the data. Next, the sources of the data were the film Philomena and its transcript. The data were collected by using visual analysis, it was conducted by (1) source download (2) accuracy check (3) data identification. The analysis was conducted by (1) coding the identified data (2) interpreting the coded data (3) checking the accuracy of the interpreted data, and (4) drawing conclusions. Peer discussions were conducted to ensure the trustworthiness of the data.

There are two results of this study. The first result is that all types of maxims are flouted. In term of dominance, maxim of relation becomes the most dominant maxim flouting because the main character is good at relating irrelevant objects. On the other hand, maxim of manner becomes the least dominant maxim because the main character is an assertive man and therefore he rarely becomes obscure since it may result in ambiguity. Meanwhile, in term of strategies, seven strategies are used; they are giving too little information, giving too much information, hyperbole, metaphor, irony, being irrelevant, and being obscure. Being irrelevant is the only strategy which can be used to flout maxim of relation. Consequently, it becomes the most dominant strategy since maxim of relation flouting is the most dominant maxim flouting. Giving too little information and irony, meanwhile, become the least dominant strategy. In the first case, it is because the main character likes to put emphases on his thoughts, which can be done better by giving more information rather than giving too little information. In case of irony, it is because the main character has a preference to insult others directly.

A. Background of the Study

Language is an indispensable part in any society. There is nobody who does not use language because of its important role in communication. Language is used when one communicates with others to convey a purpose. As a result, information can be spread everywhere and society will keep developing. However, the reason mentioned before is not the only one. Language can also be used to create bonds. What is meant by ‘to create bonds’ is that one can communicate with others to stay socially connected with others.

Conversation, which is a form of daily conversation, is a speech that can be used to establish and maintain social ties (Thornbury and Slade, 2006:25). In addition to Thornbury and Slade, Warren (2006:8) states that conversation must include at least two people. In short, conversation is a speech which involves two or more people and can be used to establish and maintain social ties.

The messages delivered in conversation, however, are not always understood by the hearers. That is why, if a person who hears an utterance cannot understand the message, he/she might experience misunderstanding, confusion and even anger. Therefore, it is important to learn more about communication. Pragmatic is a branch of linguistic which concerns with the study of meaning of communications between

speakers and hearer (Yule,1996:3). Therefore, pragmatics can be used to analyze everyday conversation.

In having a conversation, even though it is not necessary, people can fulfill the Cooperative Principles. According to Yule (1996:128), Cooperative principle is a basic assumption in conversation that each participant can attempt so that they contribute appropriately, at the required time, to the current exchange of talk. Therefore, Cooperative Principle can help people to cooperate in conversation. The Cooperative Principles consist of four maxims; i.e. maxim of quantity, maxim of quality, maxim of relation and maxim of manner. In maxim of quantity, one makes his/her contribution as informative as required and do not make the contribution more informative. Maxim of quality obliges one to make the contribution that is true. In following maxim of relation, one must be relevant. Lastly, one must be perspicuous in obeying maxim of manner (Grice in Yule, 1996:37).

In performing utterances, some people do not always want to cooperate because they have certain reasons such as to avoid unpleasant situations, to be polite, and to make jokes. Those kinds of acts can fall into categories such as maxim flouting, maxim violation, maxim infringement, and maxim opt out. The example of maxim flouting can be seen in the following dialogue:

A: Turn on the fan. B: It’s broken.

When A asks B to turn on the fan, B responds to him by saying that the fan is broken instead of turning on the fan. He chooses to do so because he wants A to

know that he cannot grant his wish since the fan is broken. The example shows that B flouts maxim of relation since he cannot turn on the fan because it is broken. The example shows that people have their own reasons to break the Cooperative Principle. Therefore, maxim flouting is interesting since it can help people analyzing the meaning behind conversation.

Conversation can be found in real life since many people communicate using a verbal language. However, conversation can also be seen in movies, since dialogues are significant parts of a movie. In watching a movie, stories or facts are delivered to the audiences through moving pictures taken from real life or animated pictures. In a movie that tells a story, the characters interact with each other, which is similar to people in real life. Therefore, a movie can be considered as a reflection of real life.

A movie entitled Philomena is chosen to be the object of this research. It is a movie about Martin Sixsmith, a recently-dismissed journalist who helps an old woman named Philomena Lee to look for his long-lost son. The movie is chosen because it reflects real-life communication and therefore it may contain maxim flouting. It was also nominated for Oscars (Pomerantz, 2014:par. 2), which means that the movie had good reputation. Those are why the movie is chosen as the object of this research.

B. Research Focus

In accordance with the background of the study, various pragmatic phenomena can be found in Philomena movie. Some pragmatic problems can be generated from the movie.

The movie, Philomena, can be analyzed through conversation analysis point of view. The conversations that occur in the movie contain various elements such as turn taking, interruption and adjacency pairs. They appear in the movie since the movie has various types of conversations.

The movie can also be analyzed through speech act point of view since some actions in the movie were done through words. The types and the functions of speech act can be used to analyze the dialogues of the movie.

The third possible problem can be seen through the Cooperative Principle point of view. There are several ways to break the Cooperative Principle, i.e. maxim flouting, maxim violating, maxim infringement, and maxim opt out. However, in the movie, the main character often commits maxim flouting because he wants other characters to look for implicatures in his utterances. In maxim flouting, the types of maxim flouting can be analyzed; they are maxim of quantity flouting, maxim of quality flouting, maxim of relation flouting and maxim of manner flouting. Besides the types of maxim flouting, the strategies of maxim flouting can also be analyzed, for example, one can commit a maxim flouting by giving too little information.

To limit the scope of the research, the types of maxim flouting and the strategies of maxim flouting were selected as the objectives of this research. The analysis of the problem is done through pragmatics point of view, or specifically Cooperative Principle.

In accordance with the limitation, the formulation of the problem are as follows:

1. What are the types of maxim flouting performed by the main character in Philomena?

2. What are the strategies of maxim flouting used by the main character in Philomena?

C. Objectives of the Research

In relation to the formulation of the problem, the objectives of the research are as follows:

1. to identify the types of maxim flouting performed by the main character in Philomena, and

2. to describe the strategies of maxim flouting used by the main character in Philomena.

D. Significances of the Research

The findings of the research are expected to be beneficial, both theoretically and practically. The benefits are as follows:

1. Theoretical Contribution

The results of this research are expected to be useful to enrich the knowledge about linguistics, especially maxim flouting. Besides, they can also be used to improve one’s knowledge about communication since maxim flouting can appear in conversation.

2. Practical Contribution

a. Students of English Language and Literature Study Program

The results of this research are expected to be useful for students of English Language and Literature Study Program as a references in conducting researches related to pragmatics, or specifically maxim flouting.

b. Other Linguistic Researchers

The results are also expected to be useful to be used as references to other linguistic researchers in conducting research related to linguistics.

CHAPTER II

LITERATURE REVIEW AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK

Theories are required in conducting a research since they can support the researcher to analyze and accumulate the data. Hence, this chapter contains the explanation of the theories that were used in this research; they are the types and strategies of maxim flouting.

A. Pragmatics

There are several definitions of pragmatics because many linguists view it from different points of view. In spite of this fact, many definitions are linked together by language, users and context. Rajimwale (2006:181) states that pragmatics is a branch of modern linguistics that focuses on the study of language from the users’ point of view. In other words, pragmatics can give more detailed information about language users.

Meanwhile, according to Yule (1996:3), pragmatics can explore how listeners make inferences about what is said so that the speaker’s intended meaning can be understood. Besides, it also explores the unsaid meaning. He also states that pragmatics is the study of meaning as communicated by a speaker (or writer) and interpreted by a hearer (or reader). To put it simply, pragmatics is the study of language users and the meaning of their communication.

Furthermore, in any communication, there is a special condition surrounding a communication, called context. According to Cruse (2006:35), context is an essential

factor which occurs in the interpretation of utterances and expressions. The most important aspects of context are preceding and following utterances and/or expressions (‘co-text’), the immediate physical situation, the wider situation, including social power relations, and knowledge presumed to be shared between the speaker and hearer. In other words, context can be found in any places where communication can happen.

Pragmatics has some topics of discussions, and one of them is deixis, which is ‘pointing’ via language, using a deictic expression (Yule, 1996:129). Griffiths (2006:14) suggests that deictic expressions are words, phrases and features of grammar that have to be interpreted in relation to the situation in which they are uttered, such as ‘me’, the sender of this utterance, or ‘here’, the place where the sender is. The deictic expressions itself consist of three parts, namely person deixis such as ‘me’ and ‘you’, spatial deixis, such as ‘here’ and ‘there’ and temporal deixis such as ‘now’ and ‘then’.

Besides deixis, there are also reference and inference. Reference is an act in which a speaker uses linguistic forms to enable a listener to identify something (Yule, 1996:17). Meanwhile, inference, according to Watts (2003:275) is a deduction made by an addressee concerning the assumed intended meaning expressed in a speaker’s utterance.

The other topics in pragmatics are presupposition and entailment. According to Yule (1996:25) presupposition is something the speaker assumes to be the case prior to make an utterance. It is the speaker, not sentences, which have presupposition.

Grundy (2000:73) states that entailment is a meaning that is present on every occasion when an expression occurs.

Yule (1996:47) states that in expressing themselves, people do not only produce utterances containing grammatical structure and words, but also perform actions via those utterances. It means that people can do something not only by doing acts, but also by saying something. For instance, when a boss in an office states “You’re fired.” to one of his employees, it means that he dismisses his employee. In other words, people can perform an action by an utterance.

In speech events, there are illocutionary act, locutionary act and perlocutionary act. Illocutionary act is the act performed via communicative force of an utterance, locutionary act is the act of saying something and perlocutionary act is the effect after the locutionary act takes place (Yule, 1996:48).

In addition, when people have a conversation, they have to show their awareness of other people’s public self-image (Yule, 1996:132). This topic is mainly discussed in politeness because in making conversations, one is supposed to avoid hurting others’ feeling. Watts (2003:9) states that politeness is not something that one born with, but something that has to be learnt. There are some aspects and strategies that people should pay attention to such as face wants and also positive and negative face. In applying it, one also can apply some strategies, which can be used to look polite when having a conversation with others.

In conversation, sometimes people give implicatures, meanings which, although intended, are not strictly part of ‘what is said’ utterance (Cruse, 2006:85). Grice in

Yule (1996:40) divides implicature into three types, namely conversational implicature, scalar implicature and conventional implicature. Furthermore, Griffiths (2006:134) states that implicatures can appear in other speech genres and in writing as they do in conversation. Alternatively, implicatures do not only appear in conversation, but also appear in another form of communication such as writing.

The first type of implicature is conversational implicature. Grice in Leech (1983:11) states that it is pragmatic implications which are derived directly from the meaning of words, rather than via conversational principles. Meanwhile, scalar implicature is an additional meaning of the negative of any value higher on a scale than the one uttered (Yule, 2006:134). The last type of implicature is conventional implicature. It is associated with specific words and results in additional conveyed meaning when those words are used. Generally, conjunctions such as ‘but’, ‘even’ and ‘yet’ are used in this implicature to contrast (Yule, 1996:45). Another topic of discussion is Cooperative Principle, which is explained in the following section. B. Cooperative Principle

Grice in Grundy (2000:74), suggests that the Cooperative Principle should be elevated in conversation. The principle can make someone give proper information in a conversation. In other words, people can try to be cooperative by elevating Cooperative Principle so that a conversation will go properly and does not contain any unnecessary or misleading information.

Cooperation means when people are having a conversation, they ‘cooperate’ to make a proper conversation and to avoid misleading or unnecessary meanings.

Yule (2006:37) defines maxim as one of the four sub-principles of the Cooperative Principle. Within the principle, there are four maxims that must be fulfilled, namely maxim of quantity, maxim of quality, maxim of relation, and maxim of manner. 1. Observance of Maxims

There are two possible outcomes of the Cooperative Principle. The first outcome is that people observe the principle. This outcome is called observance of maxims. Meanwhile, the second outcome is when people do not observe the principle. This outcome is called non-observance of maxims. In observance of maxims, people observe the Cooperative Principle to make proper conversations. The followings are the examples of observance of maxims.

a. Maxim of Quantity

In observing this maxim, Grice (1975:45) states that the contribution made in a conversation should be as informative as required. Furthermore, he also states that it should not be more informative than which is required. In other words, the information given should be sufficient, is not lacking or abundant because it can cause confusion. The following dialogue between a mother and a daughter below is an example observance of this maxim.

Mother : What did you have for lunch today? Daughter : Baked beans on toast.

(Cruse, 2000:356)

The mother asks what kind of food her daughter had for lunch. In response to the mother, the daughter says ‘baked beans on toast’, which has the required amount of information needed by the mother.

b. Maxim of Quality

According to Grice (1975:46), to fulfill this maxim, the information provided in a conversation should not be false. Besides, it also should not lack of adequate evidence. In accordance with Grice, Cutting (2002:35) states that speakers are expected to be sincere. Besides, he also states that the speakers should say something that corresponds to reality. To sum up, someone should say something that is true and has evidence to clarify the truth. An example of this maxim’s use can be seen in the following example.

A: I’ll ring you tomorrow afternoon, then.

B: Urm, I shall be there as far as I know and in the meantime have a word with Mum and Dad if they’re free. Right, bye-bye then sweetheart.

A: Bye-bye, bye.

(Gillian in Cutting, 2002:35)

B, by saying ‘as far as I know’, observes the maxim of quality because he/she is not sure whether what she said is true or not. If he/she had not observed the maxim of quality, he/she would have been accused for not being true. To sum up, he/she speaks sincerely because he/she feels uncertain and tells it to A and successful in observing the maxim of quality.

c. Maxim of Relation

Grice (1975:46) suggests that to observe this maxim, being relevant is the way. Furthermore, Cutting (2002:35) states that speakers have to accept that they should say something that is relevant to what has been said before. In short, in observing the maxim of relation, the information given in a conversation has to be related to the

conversation topic. An example of this maxim’s observance can be seen in the following dialogue.

Husband: Where are the car keys?

Wife : They’re in the table in the hall. (Thomas, 1995:64)

In the dialogue, B gives an answer that is relevant to A’s question, which is asking for the location of an object. Therefore, B observes the maxim of relation because his answer is relevant to what has been said before.

d. Maxim of Manner

This maxim can be observed by being perspicuous. It means that one has to avoid stating an obscure and ambiguous expression. Besides, he/she also has to be brief and orderly (Yule, 2006:37). The sentence ‘The lone ranger rode off into the sunset and jumped on his horse’ (Cruse, 2000:357) for example, observes the maxim of manner since the process of the events is not ambiguous.

2. Non-Observance of Maxims

In any conversation, however, everyone does not always observe the Cooperative Principle; any kind of non-observance of maxims can be found. Non-observance of maxims is a condition where speakers cannot fulfill the maxims in Cooperative Principle. Grice in Cutting (2002:37) says that maxim opt out, maxim violation, maxim infringement, and maxim flouting are the types of non-observance of maxims. Every single of them can break Cooperative Principle by breaking the four maxims.

a. Maxim Opt Out

According to Cutting (2002:41), maxim opt out means that the speaker refuses to cooperate with the maxims. It indicates an unwillingness of the speaker to cooperate with the maxims. However, the speaker does not want to appear uncooperative. He/she cannot reply in the way expected, sometimes for legal or ethical reasons, for example, ‘I’m afraid I can’t give you that information.’

b. Maxim Violation

In maxim violation, the speaker’s main purpose is to discourage the hearer to seek for implicatures. The example is the sentence ‘Mummy’s gone on a little holiday because she needs a rest’ that is said to a five-year-old child. In the sentence, the speaker decided to say it to the child in lieu of telling the truth that the mother is taking a break to decide whether she wants a divorce or not. The purpose of this violation is to avoid making the child devastated and it is done by covering up the truth, which means that the information is not true (Cutting, 2002:40).

c. Maxim Infringement

Thomas (1995:74) states that a speaker who infringes a maxim fails to observe a maxim because of his/her imperfect linguistic performance rather than from any desire to generate a conversational implicature. This can happen if the speaker has an imperfect command of the language (a child or a foreigner), if his/her performance is impaired in some way (nervousness, drunkenness, excitement), if he/she has cognitive impairment, or he/she is simply incapable of speaking clearly. For example, when a speaker who is drunk says ‘Hello, shirt, nice mate you have

there’, a maxim infringement occurs because his utterance is not clear and not containing any implicature, given the speaker’s condition.

d. Maxim Flouting

Maxim flouting is defined by Grice (1975:49) as a situation when maxims are not observed and implicatures rise from it. Meanwhile, Cutting (2002:37) believes that when speakers appear not to observe the maxims but expect hearers to appreciate the meaning implied, they are flouting the maxims. Just as with indirect speech act, the speaker implies a function different from the literal meaning of form. When maxim flouting occurs, the speaker assumes that the hearer knows that their words should not be taken at face value and that they can infer the implicit meaning.

In addition to Grice and Cutting, Thomas (1995:65) states that maxim flouting happens when a speaker fails to observe a maxim obviously, not with any intention of deceiving or misleading, but because the speaker wishes the hearer to look at the meaning, which is different from, or in addition to the expressed meaning. In other words, a maxim flouting takes place when a speaker does not observe the Cooperative Principle, yet he/she still expects others to look for an implicature in his utterance.

1) Types of Maxim Flouting

There are four types of maxim flouting; each is explained in the following page.

a) Maxim of Quantity Flouting

In flouting the maxim of quantity, the amount of information given by someone is either too little or too much (Cutting, 2002:37). As a result, the amount of information given is not sufficient, but contains implicatures. The following dialogue is an example of this phenomenon.

A:Well, how do I look? B:Your shoes are nice. (Cutting, 2002:37)

In the dialogue, A asks B about his/her appearence. However, B’s responded A by commenting only on the shoes when A asks for the whole appearance. Therefore, B has flouted maxim of quantity since he/she does not give the required amount of information. However, B implies that only A’s shoes that catches his/her interest, which means that A’s appearance looks average except his/her shoes.

Another example of maxim of quantity flouting can be seen when someone is looking for a lost item, and saying ‘It must be somewhere’ (Cruse, 2000:361). The amount of information related to the item contained in the sentence is lacking because it does not sound helpful to find the item. However, it is not pointless. The sentence implicates that a more determined effort will give more chance to success.

b) Maxim of Quality Flouting

When flouting the maxim of quality, someone’s statement is not true and lack of adequate evidence (Thomas, 1995:67). However, it contains implicature. The following dialogue is an example of this phenomenon.

A: Why don’t you eat more?

B: I think my stomach’s gonna explode.

In the dialogue above, B flouts the maxim of quality. Even though he/she can simply say that his/her is already full, he/she tells that his/her stomach is going to explode. The utterance should not be taken literally because human’s stomach cannot explode by eating too much. He/she says that to intensify the fact that he/she is already full and not able to eat anymore.

The second example of maxim of quality flouting can be seen in the statement ‘Queen Victoria was made of iron’ that is said by an admirer of the queen (Levinson, 1983:110). Literally, it is false because there is no human who is made of iron. However, it is a commendation. The queen is similar to iron because she is tough and resilient.

The third example appears in the sentence ‘I married a rat’ (Cruse, 2000:361), which is said by a housewife. Her utterance cannot be taken literally because it is impossible for a human to marry a rat. However, she says ‘a rat’ to refer to her husband because she thinks that he is nasty and untidy, which resembles rats in reality. She says it to express her irritation.

c) Maxim of Relation Flouting

In maxim of relation flouting, a statement is made to be irrelevant to the topic (Thomas, 1995:70). In other words, it does not have any relation with the preceding statement. Nonetheless, it still has implicatures expected to be understood by the hearer. An example of this type of flouting is presented in the following page.

A: Dad, I want that toy.

B: You must get a perfect score in your next exam, son.

A expresses his desire to buy a toy to his father. However, in the dialogue above, B flouts the maxim of relation by giving an answer that has no relation to what has been said before. He says that he wants his son to get a perfect score. The implicature is that the son should impress his father before his wish is granted.

The dialogue between A and B below is another dialogue that contains maxim of relation flouting. They are talking about a box of chocolate that belongs to A.

A: Where’s my box of chocolates?

B: The children were in your room this morning. (Leech, 1983:94)

A is looking for his chocolate box. B, who is asked by A, answers him by saying that the children were in his room, which is irrelevant since A is asking where his chocolate is, not the children. However, B’s response is not pointless because there is an implicature in the response. B tries to say that A’s chocolate may already be eaten by the children.

d) Maxim of Manner Flouting

Those who flout the maxim of manner appear to be obscure, are often trying to exclude the third party (Cutting, 2002:39), for example:

A: So, what’s his birthday present?

B: You know, it’s a flying stuff with propellers on it that you can control by using a remote.

The dialogue above shows that B wants to give his son a present and talks about it with A, his wife in front of his son who is still three. B speaks in ambiguous way,

saying ‘flying stuff with propellers on it that you can control with remote’ which means helicopter radio control, so that the child does not get too excited before he opens the present.

The next example of this phenomenon can be seen in the dialogue below between A and B. They talk about what to give to their children.

A: Let’s get the kids something.

B: Okay, but I veto I-C-E-C-R-E-A-M-S. (Levinson, 1983:104)

In the dialogue, A suggests B, her husband, to buy something for her children. However, B says that he wants to buy them ice cream by spelling it and that makes what he says obscure. He does that to make the children unable to understand his words. Hence, he flouts the maxim of manner.

2) Strategies of Maxim Flouting

In flouting a maxim, there are several strategies used. Those strategies are listed below.

a) Giving too Little Information

The speaker who flouts the maxim of quantity seems to give too little or too much information (Cutting, 2002:37). The following dialogue between a mother and her daughter shows this strategy of maxim of quantity flouting

M: What did you have for lunch today?

D: Food.

(Cruse, 2000:356)

The daughter answers her mother’s question. However a flouting of the maxim of quantity takes place here. She gives too little information and makes her answer seem

less specific. Instead of giving a proper answer such as ‘bacon’ or ‘bread’, she answers the question by saying ‘food’, which is too little in term of the amount of information. However, she says that to tell her mother that she was not impressed by the food.

Levinson (1983:110-111) states that tautology is a strategy to flout the maxim of quantity because it does not have any communicative importance. It does not appear to be informative, which means that it lacks information. Nonetheless, it can convey a great deal. The sentence ‘If he does it, he does it’ for example, does not contain much significant information. However, it means ‘It is not our concern’, which tells the hearer to not distract him.

b) Giving too Much Information

The maxim of quantity flouting can also happen when an answer has too much information, such as in the following example.

M: What did you have for lunch today?

D: I had 87 warmed-up baked beans (although eight of them were slightly crushed) served on a slice of toast 12.7 cm, by 10.3 cm which had been unevenly toasted...

(Cruse, 2000:356)

In this case, the daughter, by saying ‘I had 87 warmed-up baked beans (although eight of them were slightly crushed) served on a slice of toast 12.7 cm, by 10.3 cm which had been unevenly toasted...’ makes a maxim of quantity flouting. It takes place when she gives too much detail in her words, which seems unnecessary to the mother. However, she says that to give more information about the average food.

c) Hyperbole

Cutting (2002:37) states that speakers flout the maxim of quality in several ways. First, they may quite simply say something that obviously does not represent what they think. Speakers may flout the maxim by exaggerating as in hyperbole. It can be used as a basis of humour.

When someone said ‘I could eat a horse’, it should not be taken literally since a flouting of the maxim of quality takes place. A human, of course, cannot eat a whole horse. However, in this case, it means that the speaker wants to say that he/she is very hungry in a comedic manner by exaggerating her condition.

Another example comes from the statement ‘It costs the earth, but what the hell!’ (Cruse, 2000:360). The speaker wants to state that he/she bought something that is unreasonably expensive. He/she wants to joke around by telling that the price is as big as earth, which is also an exaggeration.

d) Metaphor

Besides hyperbole, metaphor can also be used as a strategy to flout the maxim of quantity (Cutting, 2002:38) because a person who speaks metaphorically invites other to ‘see something as something else’ (Cruse, 2006:106). In addition to Cruse, Bergmann in Martinich (1984:80-81) states that every metaphor is literally false or is supposed to be false and contains implicatures. Sentences such as ‘My house is a refrigerator in January’ and ‘Don’t be such a wet blanket-we just want to have fun’ are the examples of the metaphor use, since both of them should not be taken literally and contain implicatures.

Conventional euphemism is also considered as a form of metaphor. Sentences such as ‘I’m going to wash my hands’ which means ‘I’m going to urinate’ and ‘She’s got a bun in the oven’ which means ‘She’s pregnant’ or ‘He kicked the bucket’ which means ‘He died’ have well-established implied meanings (Cutting, 2002:38).

e) Irony

Irony can also be used to flout the maxim of quality. Leech in Cutting (2002:38) states that irony is a friendly way of being offensive. Therefore, a speaker expresses a positive sentiment but implies a negative one. For instance, if a student comes down to have a breakfast and says ‘If only you knew how much I love being woken up at 4 am by a fire alarm’, it means that she does not love being woken up early but states it in a positive way. She expects her friend to know that she means the opposite. Another example of irony can be seen when someone says ‘It’s lovely weather for June’ during a freezing rain (Allott, 2010:48). It means that the person is complaining about the weather by saying that it is good, which is the opposite of what is actually happening.

Another form of irony is called sarcasm. According to Cutting (2002:38), sarcasm is a form of irony that is not friendly and is usually intended to hurt others. The sentences ‘This is a lovely undercooked egg you’ve given me here, as usual. Yum!’ and ‘Why don’t you leave all your dirty clothes on the lounge floor, love, and then you only need to wash them when someone breaks a leg trying to get to the sofa?’ are the example of sarcasm because they are said to hurt others. It can hurt other people because it gives more negative sentiment less friendly than general irony.

f) Banter

The type of verbal behaviour known as “banter” is an offensive way of being friendly. It contains a positive sentiment in a negative one and it can be teasing and flirtatious (Cutting, 2002:38). Therefore, banter’s nature is completely different from irony because it looks offensive yet actually friendly. The sentence ‘You’re nasty, mean and stingy. How can you only give me one kiss?’ is an example of banter use. Even though it sounds unfriendly, the speaker uses that sentence to express intimacy and flirtation.

g) Being Irrelevant

When observing the maxim of relation, one must be relevant, or the utterance must be related to the previous utterance. However, in maxim of relation flouting, one will become irrelevant. The following dialogue between Johnny and his mother is an example of this strategy’s use.

Johnny: Hey Sally, let’s play marbles.

Mother: How is your homework getting along Johnny? (Grice in Levinson, 1983:111)

Johnny invites Sally to play marbles. However, his mother says something about his homework. What his mother says is irrelevant since Johnny talks about marbles. In other words, his mother is being irrelevant to remind her son about his homework and expects him to do it right away.

The next example of this strategy’s use can be seen in the following dialogue between A and B. They talk about Mary, their friend.

A: I say, did you hear about Mary’s.

B: Yes, well, it rained nearly the whole time we were there.

(Cruse, 2000:361)

In this case, A, who is talking about Mary, is interrupted by B. When the interruption happens, Mary is approaching them. B knows it, but A does not. She wants to tell A that Mary is approaching them by telling the weather’s condition so that A stops talking about Mary.

h) Being Obscure

Maxim of manner flouting can be done by being obscure. It is because one should be perspicuous to observe the maxim of manner. An example can be seen in the following dialogue.

A: I’ll look for Samantha for you, don’t worry. We’ll have a lovely time. Won’t we, Sam?

B: Great, but if you don’t mind, don’t offer her any post-prandial concoctions involving supercooled oxide of hydrogen. It usually gives rise to convulsive nausea.

(Cruse, 2000:361)

A ask B wants to asks b whether they are going to have a lovely time or not. However, B replies her by saying a very ambiguous utterance. The utterance is said because B does not want Samantha to know what he is saying.

Sometimes writers play with words to heighten the ambiguity to make a point. In the sentence ‘I wouldn’t say when you’ve seen one Western you’ve seen the lot, but when you’ve seen the lot you get the feeling you’ve seen one’ (Whitehorn in Cutting, 2002:39), the writer implied that she agreed with the first point of view, even though she had just said that she did not agree with it.

3) Types and Strategies Overlap in Maxim Flouting

In flouting a maxim in Cooperative Principle, one can include more than one maxim. Cutting (2002:42) states that an overlap between four maxims occasionally occurs. In other words, two or more maxims are included when one performs maxim flouting and both of them operate at once. The following dialogue between A and B is an example of this phenomenon.

A: What did you have to eat?

B: Oh, something masquerading as chicken chasseur. (Cutting, 2002: 42)

B, in the dialogue above, flouts a maxim of manner because he does not clearly say what he means by ‘something’. However, it is clear that it is not chicken chasseur. Besides flouting the maxim of manner flouting, B also flouts the maxim of quantity because his utterance does not contain the information required by A.

Besides the types of maxim flouting, overlap of strategies of maxim flouting can also occur. The example of this phenomenon appears in the dialogue between A and B.

A: I’m beginning to realise why em jobs in language schools run out so sharply in the autumn and in the spring. It’s all these damn MSc students and their wives, heh heh.

B: Heh heh heh heh

A: Now I know I was never wanted on October. B: Yeah, that’s right, heh.

(Cutting, 2002:38)

B’s wife has just got a job teaching English as a second language and he tells it to A, who is also teaching English as a second language. In this example, A does not

appear to b curses them she is actu only strate the jobs ru C. Philom

Phi

Frears. Th was played was played The plot w lost son. It was well-a

be pleased m. However ually happy, egy used in un out so sha

ena

ilomena is a

he main cha d by Steve C d by Judi D was based on

t was nomin accepted by

when she t r, she is onl , which mea

the dialogu arply to exag

Figure 1 a drama mo racter, Mart Coogan, a B Dench, who n Philomena

nated for O many peopl

talks about ly pretendin ans that she ue because h

ggerate the

. DVD Cov vie which w tin Sixsmith British actor

shares the s a Lee’s real Oscars (Pom

le.

MSc stude ng to be ang e uses bante

hyperbole a fact that the

ver of Philo was released

h, was a dis . Meanwhil same countr

story when erantz, 2014

nts and the gry. She doe er. However also exists w e job is occu

mena d in 2013, d

smissed Bri e, Philomen ry of origin n she was loo 4:par. 2), w

eir wives sin es that to sho r, banter is when she sa upied quickl

directed by S itish journa na, a deutera

with Mr. C oking for he which means nce she ow that not the ays that ly. Stephen list. He agonist, Coogan. er long-s that it

In this movie, Martin, who lost his job, was looking for another job to pay his living expenses. He planned to write a book about Russian history to make some money. However, he stalled his plan after he met Sally, an editor whose job was polishing human interest stories at a restaurant. She offered him a chance to work under her by writing a human interest story. At first, he appeared reluctant to accept the offer since writing human interest did not interest him. However, it all started to change after he met Jane, Philomena’s daughter at the same restaurant where he met Sally. Not long after that, he met Philomena, who wanted him to help her look for Anthony, her son who was separated from her years ago. Surprisingly, even though her request was related to human interest, his pride did not hinder him to help the poor old lady.

On their first attempt, they visited Sean Ross, the abbey where Philomena spent her youth. The people there, however, were unwilling to cooperate with them and secretive about Anthony, which made finding a clue more difficult. When they took a rest at an inn, two people who appeared to be employees there told Martin that the people of the abbey sold babies to Americans and it led him to leave Europe. However, he found out that Anthony had already died even though he had not spent much time in the States with the Irish mother.

Even though Martin wanted to go back to the United Kingdom with Philomena, Sally, who had become his editor, told him to continue investigating Anthony’s case with the poor mother. After having an argument with his editor, he still wants to go back, but suddenly Philomena says that she wants to stay longer in

the United States to meet people who met her son. After hearing that, Martin agreed to do what she wanted. One night, much to his surprise, he remembered that he had met Anthony during his time as a journalist. Philomena’s son was a lawyer for Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush during his lifetime under his adoptive name, Michael Hess, which made the investigation easier since he was a famous figure.

Martin and Philomena continued their investigation by asking people who had close relationships with Anthony. Their effort to find him was paid off when a man named Pete Olsson told them that Anthony was buried at Sean Ross because it was his dying wish.

Feeling deceived by the people of the abbey, Martin decided to go back and made a rumpus there because he got very angry even though Philomena said that she forgave them. After he calmed down, he visited Anthony’s grave with Philomena to show respect. At the end of the story, it was announced that Martin had published a book about his journey entitled The Lost Child of Philomena Lee.

D. Related Studies

Some studies related to maxim flouting have been conducted by some researchers as means to give contributions to pragmatics understanding. Some of them can be read to strengthen the theories that are used in this research. In this case, there are two studies related to maxim flouting that had been read before conducting this research.

Septi Dyah Anggraini, who was a student of Yogyakarta State University, had conducted a research that was done in 2013. In her research entitled A Pragmatic

Analysis of Humor in Modern Family Season 4, she analyzed the types of maxim

flouting, the forms of humour created, and the functions of humour created. It is because maxim flouting can generate humour. The theories of Cooperative Principle and strategies of maxim flouting, proposed by Grice and Cutting respectively, were applied to determine the types and strategies of maxim flouting. Meanwhile, the theory of humour forms, which was proposed by Martin, was also applied. Lastly, in analyzing the functions of humour, she applied Attardo’s theory. The results of the research show that using maxim of manner flouting is not a good way to create humour because it may lead the hearer to confusion and result in misinterpretation. Besides, maxim flouting can be used to create two types of humour, namely joke and spontaneous situational humour. It was also found that the humours in the movies are mainly used to strengthen family bond because the setting of the movie is in a caring family.

Heri Yusup also conducted a similar research. In a research entitled Politeness Strategy and Maxim in Liar Liar (1997): A Pragmatic Study, he described the

politeness maxims and the maxims of Cooperative Principle that were broken in the movie. Furthermore, he aimed to identify politeness strategies and the types of maxim violation in Cooperative Principle and explained the process. In analyzing the movie, he used the politeness strategies theory that was proposed by Brown and Levinson in Cutting. He also used the politeness maxim theory which was proposed by Leech. Meanwhile, in analyzing the types of maxim violation, he used Grice’s theory of Cooperative Principle. He stated in the conclusion part of his research that Fletcher

Reede, the main character, violated the maxims of Cooperative Principle and performed politeness strategies and maxims to show politeness to others. Reede did it to make himself stay likable in his office, similar to many people in real life.

This thesis is similar to those that were made by Septi and Heri because it deals with Cooperative Principle. However, this thesis is different in terms of objectives because its aims are identifying the types and strategies of maxim flouting, unlike Septi who related maxim flouting to humour and Heri who related Cooperative Principle to politeness.

E. Conceptual Framework

In learning pragmatics, one has to be able to get the relation between language, users and context since they are the main focus of pragmatics. In terms of range, pragmatics’ range is not limited only on verbal communication, but also written communication and can occur in any place.

Inside pragmatics, there is a theory which was proposed by Grice called ‘Cooperative Principle’ which has four sub-principles called ‘maxim’. They consist of maxim of quantity, maxim of quality, maxim of relation, and maxim of manner. Those four sub-principles has roles to make a conversation go properly and does not contain any unnecessary or incorrect information. Each maxim has its own role in a conversation, take the maxim of quantity for example. It can make the speaker give the required amount of information and does not make him add any unnecessary information or be less informative.

However, not everyone observes the Cooperative Principle. When someone tries to give an implicature in his/her utterance, it is called maxim flouting. In maxim flouting, every maxim is not observed. Giving too little information and giving too much information are the strategies to flout the maxim of quantity. Next, in maxim of quality flouting, there are four strategies which can be applied; they are hyperbole, metaphor, irony, and banter. Meanwhile, in maxim of relation flouting, being irrelevant can be applied. Lastly, in maxim of manner flouting, the strategy is being obscure. The strategies used to flout those maxims are different depending on the types of maxim flouting.

The aforementioned theories were used by the researcher to analyze the maxim flouting in Philomena. The scheme of research is presented in Figure 2. Analytical Construct on the following page.

Figure 2. Analytical Construct

Implicature Presupposition Speech

acts Cooperative Principle Deixis Politeness

Philomena Movie

Maxim of Manner Maxim of

Relation Maxim of

Quality Maxim of

Quantity

Non-Observance

Maxim Flouting

Types Strategies

Giving too much information, Giving too little information 1. Maxim of Quantity Flouting

Hyperbole, Metaphor, Irony, Banter

2. Maxim of Quality Flouting

3. Maxim of Relation Flouting Being Irrelevant

4. Maxim of Manner Flouting Being Obscure Observance

CHAPTER III

RESEARCH METHOD

In this chapter, the aspects of research that were applied in this research are explained. There are six aspects in total, they are types of study, research instrument, forms, contexts, and sources of data, techniques of data collection, techniques of data analysis and data trustworthiness.

A. Types of Study

Descriptive qualitative is a research which has descriptive nature (Jensen and Jankowski, 1991:44). Since this research deals with describing maxim flouting, it is considered as a qualitative research. The purpose of the use of the qualitative design was to explain the types of maxim flouting and also the strategies used in maxim flouting performed by the main character of Philomena movie. The object of this research was a movie, and therefore the method above was applied to analyze the whole movie. However, the researcher also used quantitative method which is limited to determine the percentage of the data. In other words, this research belongs to qualitative-quantitative research.

B. Research Instruments

Heigham and Croker (2009:11) state that the primary research instrument in qualitative research is the researcher him/herself. Therefore, the researcher became the main instrument of this research. Data sheet also became an instrument in this research and was used to illustrate the data.

C. Forms, Contexts, and Sources of Data

In this research, the forms of the data were lingual units consisting of words, phrases, clauses and sentences in the Philomena movie. The contexts of the data were dialogues which contain maxim flouting since the object of the research was a movie, which has a lot of dialogues. The sources of the data were Philomena movie and its transcript.

D. Techniques of Data Collection

Denscombe (2007:286) states that qualitative data take the form of words and visual images. In addition to Denscombe, Vanderstoep and Johnston (2009:189) state that visual analysis, e.g. interpretation of films and television programs, which mediated communication texts, is one of data collecting techniques. Therefore, in conducting this research, the data were collected by using visual analysis. They were collected from the dialogues that contained maxim flouting in the movie and also from the transcript of the movie. The steps that were used by the researcher are described as follows.

First, the sources of the data were downloaded. Next, the researcher watched the movie and carefully checked the script and the dialogue to ensure the accuracy. The last step is the identification of the data.

E. Techniques of Data Analysis

According to Gray, et al (2007:2), data analysis is an attempt to arrange and organize data so that their significance will be discovered. In this research, the

dialogues which contain maxim flouting in Philomena were analyzed. The methods of data analysis can be seen below.

The first step was the coding of the identified data. Codes were given to them to ease data analysis. The interpretation was the next step in data analysis. More detailed explanations were made in this step to find the meaning of the data. Before concluding the data, the researcher checked the accuracy of the data again. Lastly, the analyzed data were then brought to conclusions. The example of the data sheet can be seen below.

Table 1. The Example of Data Sheet of Types and Strategies of Maxim Flouting Performed by the Main Character in Philomena

Code Data Maxim Flouting Context

QT QL RL MA

TL TM HB MT IO BA IR OB 1/

RL/I R

Robert: There's nothing wrong with you, Martin. Uh, your wife tells me you think you're mildly depressed? Martin: Well, I got the sack. I'm unemployed.

✓ When Robert asks Martin whether he is mildly depressed or not, Martin flouts the maxim of quality by being irrelevant. He says that he is unemployed, although Robert asks about his health. He does it to explain why he is depressed.

Note:

1 : Number of datum

QT : maxim of quantity HB : hyprebole QL : maxim of quality MT : metaphor RL : maxim of relation IO : irony MA: maxim of manner BA : banter

TL : giving too little information IR : being irrelevant TM: giving too much information OB : being obscure

E. Data Trustworthiness

Lincoln and Guba in Flick (2009:392) suggest that trustworthiness is one of the criteria for qualitative research. Therefore, to ensure the trustworthiness of the data, the researcher had peer discussions. In this research, two people had been employed as peer editors; they were Siti Nur Khasanah Fatmawati and Wisnu Ngudi Arto. Both of them were students of Yogyakarta State University who majored in linguistics. The researcher’s supervisors were also involved in checking the data trustworthiness since the researcher conducted consultations with them. They all had examined this research’s data and theories to ensure their accuracy.

There are two sections in this chapter, namely findings and discussion. The table of research findings is provided in the first section. Meanwhile, the more detailed data explanations including examples about the types of maxim flouting and the strategies to flout maxim performed by the main character in Philomena can be found in second section.

A. Findings

In this section, the data which were taken from the analysis of the main character’s utterances in Philomena are shown in Table 2. The data were categorized based on the objectives, which are to identify the types of maxim flouting and to describe the strategies used to flout a maxim. In identifying the types of maxim flouting, Grice’s theory of Cooperative Principle was used. Meanwhile, in describing the strategies used to flout maxim, Cutting’s theory of maxim flouting strategies was used. The following table shows the types and strategies of maxim flouting performed by the main character in Philomena.

Table 2. Frequency of Occurrences of Types and Strategies of Maxim Flouting Performed by the Main Character in Philomena

Types of Maxim Flouting

Strategies of Maxim Flouting

TL TM HB MT IO BA IR OB Frequency Percentage_(%) Maxim of

Quantity 2 15 - - - - - - 17

35.4

Maxim of

Quality - - 4 3 2 0 - - 9

18.8

Maxim of

Relation - - - 19 - 19

39.6

Maxim of

Manner - - - - - - - 3 3

6.2

Total 2 15 4 3 2 0 19 3 48 100 Percantage (%)

4.2 31

.2

8.4 6.2 4.2 0 39.6 6.2 100

Note:

QT : maxim of quantity HB : hyperbole QL : maxim of quality MT : metaphor RL : maxim of relation IO : irony MA : maxim of manner BA : banter

TL : giving too little information IR : being irrelevant TM : giving too much information OB : being obscure

In relation to the first objective, which is to identify the types of maxim flouting performed by the main character in Philomena, the table above shows that all types of maxim flouting occur in Philomena; they are maxim of quantity flouting, maxim of quality flouting, maxim of relation flouting, and maxim of manner flouting.

It also shows that the frequency of the data of each maxim is different. The most frequently occurred maxim flouting is maxim of relation flouting with the percentage of 39.6% because it occurs 19 times out of 48. Maxim of relation flouting is followed by maxim of quantity flouting since it occurs 16 times, with the percentage of 35.4%. Next, maxim of quality occurs 9 times out of 46 with the percentage of 18.8%. Meanwhile, maxim of manner flouting has the least occurrence because it occurs 3 times, with the percentage of 6.2%.

Meanwhile, in relation to the second objective, which is to describe the strategies of maxim flouting used by the main character in Philomena, all strategies occur except banter; they are giving too little information, giving too much information, hyperbole, metaphor, irony, being irrelevant, and being obscure. The most frequently occurred strategy is being irrelevant. It occurs 19 times out of 48 with the percentage of 39.6%, followed by giving too much information, which occurs 15 times out of 48 with the percentage of 31.2%. Next, hyperbole follows giving too much information since it occurs 4 times with the percentage of 8.4%. Then, being obscure and metaphor follow hyperbole since both occur 3 times with the percentage of 6.2%. Following being obscure and metaphor are giving too little information and irony. They occur twice with the percentage of 4.2%. Banter, meanwhile, does not occur because the main character is serious most of the time and finds it uncomfortable to use this strategy.

B. Discussion

1. Types of Maxim Flouting Performed by the Main Character in Philomena In everyday life, sometimes people flout maxims when delivering their messages and Martin, the main character in Philomena, is not an exception because the movie is a reflection of real life. This sub-chapter is divided into four parts, namely maxim of quantity flouting, maxim of quality flouting, maxim of relation flouting and maxim of manner flouting.

a. Maxim of Quantity Flouting

One of the types of maxim flouting is maxim of quantity flouting. This type of maxim flouting occurs when someone does not give a proper amount of information. It occurs 17 times.

An example of maxim of quantity flouting can be seen in the following dialogue between Martin and Robert. They talk about Martin’s dismissal.

Robert: Yes, but it wasn't your fault, was it?

Martin: That's why I'm depressed. I got sacked for saying something I didn't say.

2/QT/TM  The dialogue takes place at a clinic. Martin is asked by Robert, a doctor, about his previous job. Martin’s wife has told Robert about her husband’s problem beforehand and therefore knows what makes Martin visit him.

In this case, Martin flouts maxim of quantity since the amount of information he gives is more than enough. He could have told Robert that he is not the one to

blame. However, he says that he got depressed because he was dismissed for something that he did not say instead. He does that because he wants to express his frustration to make him feel better.

The next example of maxim of quantity flouting occurs when Martin talks to David, a man who occurs to be his old friend at a restaurant. They talk about Martin’s past.

David: Then he became a spin doctor for the government, and it all went a bit tits-up. Is that a fair summation, Martin?

Martin: That's fair enough. I always say, "If you shovel shit for long enough, eventually you'll get some on your shoes."

8/QT/TM Actually, Martin can respond David with few words because David does not really expect a long response. He can simply say that the summation is fair enough, which is already said.

However, Martin flouts maxim of quantity because his response is more informative than which is required by saying ‘If you shovel shit for long enough, eventually you'll get some on your shoes’, a metaphor. It means that if someone is involved in a bad activity for a long time, it will affect him/her badly, which is similar to what Martin experienced during his time as a journalist. However, it is not pointless because he says it on purpose, that is to joke around.

The third example of this maxim flouting happens in the dialogue between Martin and a waitress. They talk about the available menu.

Waitress: We also have pancakes.

Martin : Thank you. Trying to have a private conversation.

27/QT/TM Martin, who is talking with Philomena, is suddenly approached by a waitress. She offers him and Philomena a lot of food and beverages continually. However, he does not appear to be interested in her offers.

As a result, he expresses his gratitude to her by saying ‘Thank you’ because he wants to at least appreciate her. Besides, he says that he is trying to have a private conversation as well, which is not expected by the waitress, to make her go away. In other words, he flouts the maxim of quantity since the information in his utterance is too much.

The dialogue between Martin and Jane below contains a maxim of quantity flouting. They talk about Martin’s reluctance to write human interest articles.

Jane : Why not?

Martin: Because "human interest story" is a euphemism for stories about weak-minded, vulnerable, ignorant people, to put in newspapers read by vulnerable, weak-minded, ignorant people. Not that you are, and, yeah, anyway, I hope you find him.

12/QT/TM Jane told Martin about her mother’s horrible past. However, he previously explained that he does not write human interest stories and it leads Jane to ask him.

In this case, Martin says that human interest story is a euphemism for weak-minded, vulnerable, ignorant people to put it on newspaper read by weak-weak-minded, vulnerable, ignorant people. It can be inferred that Martin is not very fond of those

stories because he thinks that they are bad. He also says that he does not intend to insult Jane by saying that she is not one of those people and hopes that she will find her brother. In other words, Martin flouts maxim of quantity since the information in his utterance is too much because although he can simply say that he does not like human interest stories, he also adds an unpleasant remark on the stories instead. He does that to put an emphasis on his disinterest in granting Jane’s wish.

b. Maxim of Quality Flouting

Someone is considered to flout maxim of quality when his/her statement is not true and does not have evidence to clarify the truth. It terms of occurrence, it occurs nine times.

An example of this phenomenon can be seen in the following dialogue between Martin and Philomena when they are having a breakfast at a hotel restaurant. They talk about a waitress in the restaurant.

Philomena: There's no need to be rude. She's a very nice person.

Martin : I know. I'm sure she's one in a million, or one in a hundred thousand.

29/QL/HB  When Martin and Philomena eat their breakfast, a waitress approaches them and offers a lot of food and beverages, which annoys Martin. The waitress keeps offering them menu until Martin indirectly tells her to go away because he and Philomena are trying to have a private conversation.

Philomena thinks that Martin looks rude since he tells the waitress to go away. However, he denies it by telling a hyperbole to flout the maxim of quality. He says that she is not rude, and a nice person like her is one in a million or one in a hundred thousand, which is not true because it is an exaggerated expression. It is not true because there are many kind-hearted people. He wants to convince the old lady that he does not mean any harm by telling that a kind-hearted waitress like her is very rare. In other words, Martin flouts the maxim of quality because his utterance is not true.

The dialogue between Martin and Sally below is another example of maxim of quality flouting. It is about Sally’s decision to keep looking for more information related to Anthony.

Sally : Then keep her there.

Martin: What? Come on, she's in bits. It's like she's lost him all over again. 34/QL/HB Martin wants to come back to England with Philomena after he found out that Anthony is already dead. However, Sally, his editor, wants him to keep looking for information related to the deceased lawyer with the Irish mother and stay in America a little longer.

After hearing his editor’s harsh decision, Martin tells her that Philomena is still mentally broken after learning her son’s death and exaggerates it by telling that she has lost him all over again, which is not true. Even though the Irish woman is mentally broken, she is not as broken as Martin says. In other words, he flouts the maxim by quality because his statement is not true and exaggerated.

The third example of this maxim flouting can be seen in the dialogue below between Martin and his old friend, Alex. The topic is Martin’s dismissal.

Alex : I hope you didn't think I dropped you in it. Martin: Don't worry about it. The fog of war.

21/QL/MT Martin talks to Alex in a plane. Alex feels guilty since he thinks that Martin was dismissed because of him.

In response to Alex’s utterance, Martin says that he should not worry about it. Besides, he also says ‘the fog of war’, which is a metaphorical expression. He wants to say to his friend that his dismissal was caused by confusion in his scandal, and therefore he should not feel guilty about it. In other words, he flouts maxim of quality because his utterance is literally not true.

c. Maxim of Relation Flouting

Maxim of relation flouting happens when, in a conversation, the information given is irrelevant, but contains an implicature. In Philomena, the main character flouts it for some reasons, for instance to divert someone’s attention, to change the topic of conversation, and to express his thoughts. This type of maxim flouting occurs 19 times.

The first example of this phenomenon is when Martin and Philomena are at Sean Ross, an abbey where Philomena spent her youth, to look for information related to Anthony, Philomena’s deceased son.

Martin: Why not?

Claire : I'm happy to answer any questions Philomena has. Martin: Well, I'm asking you a question.

19/RL/IR They are welcomed by Claire, a young nun who appears friendly. When Martin sees Hildergarde, a senior nun who passes him, he wants to talk to her because he thinks that she might know the truth about Anthony. However, Claire becomes strangely secretive to him after he says that he wants to meet the old nun. Actually, she knows that senior nuns at the abbey have some information about Philomena’s son. However, she does not grant Martin’s request without providing a relevant reason. It is irrelevant because when Martin asks why he is not allowed to talk to the senior nun, she should have given a relevant reason e.g. the nun is not in a good condition to talk in lieu of saying that she is happy to answer Philomena’s question.

Feeling irritated after hearing Claire’s irrelevant reason, which does not satisfy his curiosity, Martin flouts maxim of relation because his statement is irrelevant. He reminds her about his previous question so that she stops being secretive and gives a relevant response.

Another example of maxim of relation flouting occurs in the dialogue between Martin and his wife, Kate. They talk about Martin’s book plan.

Kate : I wish you had. You need to get back to work. What happened to that book on Russian history?

Martin: No one's interested in Russian bloody history.

Kate is worried because her husband needs to get back to work to make some money. However, she knows that her husband is going to write a book about Russian history, which gives her some hope, and she asks him about its progress.

When Kate expects an answer about the progress of the book, Martin flouts maxim of relation by saying that no one is interested in Russian bloody history, which is not the answer she wants to hear since she asks about the book progress, not Russian history. He flouts maxim of relation because he wants to state his pessimism about the book plan.

There is another example of this phenomenon that occurs on the scene when Martin is having a quarrel with Hildegarde inside Sean Ross.

Hildegarde: Their suffering was atonement for their sins. Martin : One of the mothers was 14 years old!

48/RL/IR On his previous visit to Sean Ross, Martin saw the graveyard of women who died at the abbey. It was treated poorly; many weeds grew all over the place and the gravestones were covered in dust. Things get worse when he saw one of the gravestones said that a mother was died when she was fourteen. Hildegarde, who does not feel any remorse, tells him that it is a punishment for what the women did during their lifetimes, in this case, having illegitimate children, which is against Christian principle.

Martin flouts the maxim of relation by giving Hildegarde an irrelevant response. When he talks about Christian value with Hildegarde, he tells something

about the graveyard, which is irrelevant. He thinks that even though she intends to punish the mothers, she has gone too far and it leads him to tell her that one of the mothers who are buried at the graveyard was died as a 14-year-old girl to make her regret what she had done.

The next example of this maxim flouting can be seen in the dialogue between Martin and Kate below. They talk about where Martin was when a service was ongoing.

Kate : Come on. I'm worried about you, Martin. Martin: I did that.

5/RL/IR Both Martin and Kate attend a service at a church, but Martin suddenly gets out and stands outside, waiting for his wife. Kate then expresses her worry for her husband because of what he had done during the service.

A maxim of relation flouting happens when Martin says ‘I did that’ while pointing at a statue of an altar boy. However, what he says does not have anything to do with what his wife said before. Hence, Martin flouts maxim of relation since his utterance is not relevant with the conversation topic. He says that to tell his wife that he is knowledgeable enough when it comes to Catholic since he used to be an altar boy and therefore does not think that attending a service is necessary.

The following dialogue between Kate and Philomena also contains a maxim of relation flouting. They talk about a priest who asked about Martin.

Kate : There you are. Well, that was embarrassing. Father Tierney just asked me where you disappeared to.

Martin: Well... I don't believe in God, and I think he can tell.

4/RL/IR The setting is outside a church. Previously, Martin got out of the church during a service and stood outside, waiting for his wife. His wife approaches him not long after the service ended. She looks embarrassed and tells him that father Tierney, a priest, asked her where Martin was.

The maxim of relation flouting happens when Martin says that he does not believe in God and the priest should be able to understand that. In this case, his answer is irrelevant because Kate asked where he was, not his faith. In other words, he tries to say that since he does not believe in God, attending a service is not necessary.

The next dialogue that contains this maxim flouting can be seen in the dialogue below between Robert and Martin. They talk about Martin’s health.

Robert: Try running.

Martin: I said the opposite of what I was sacked for.

3/RL/IR Martin talks to Robert, a doctor, because he feels that he is not in a good shape after his dismissal. However, Robert thinks that Martin’s condition is not as bad as his patient thought and suggests him to run to make his shape better.

In this case, the maxim of relation flouting happens when Martin says that he said the opposite of what he was sacked for, which does not have anything to do with

Robert’s suggestion to express his frustration so that he feels better. In other words, Martin flouts maxim of relation because what he says is not relevant with the previous utterance.

The last example of this maxim flouting occurs in the dialogue between Martin and Sally. They talk about Anthony’s story.

Sally : Dead or alive, happy or sad. They're both good. Spin it. Find a story. Martin: Look, if I stay here and she goes home, no one's going to answer

my questions.

33/RL/IR After Martin tells Sally that Anthony is already dead, she thinks that the story is good no matter how it ends. However, she does not appear to be satisfied and demands more from Martin. She orders him to falsify the story so that it looks more interesting than what was actually happened.

In this case, Martin flouts maxim of relation because his response is not relevant to Sally’s order. He says that if he stays in America without Philomena, nobody is going to answer his questions since he does not have anything to do with Anthony. In other words, he tries to say to Sally that if Philomena goes home, he will find it difficult to look for the information related to her son and therefore cannot make the story more interesting, which is what she wants.

d. Maxim of Manner Flouting

When someone’s utterance meaning is not clear to make a certain point, it means that he/she flouts maxim of manner flouting. As a result, the messages

delivered by the speaker can be difficult for the hearer to understand. Nonetheless, it still has a meaning. In terms of occurrence, this maxim occurs only 3 times.

An example of this phenomenon can be seen in the following dialogue. This time, it is Martin and Philomena who talk about Philomena’s request to look for her long-lost son.

Jane : I'm taking mum to Ireland for a few days next week. Why don't you come with us? You could visit Roscrea with her.

Philomena: Yes, there's plenty of room. It's a Vauxhall Cavalier. Martin : Oh, no. I mean, thank you, but... I like to fly.

13/MA/OB Martin has a conversation with Jane, who accompanies Philomena, at a family restaurant. He is there to discuss Philomena’s horrible past and her long-lost son, Anthony. However, Philomena suddenly says that she wants him to help her find Anthony so that she can learn her son’s whereabouts. Martin still appears hesitant until Jane tells him that she wants to go with her mother to Ireland.

Martin flouts maxim of manner. In his utterance, he says that he does not want to help her find Anthony, but he implies that he wants to by saying that he likes to fly. He does it to say even though he is in doubt, he still wants to help the Irish mother.

The next example of maxim flouting occurs in the dialogue between Martin and Philomena when they are on the way to Sean Ross, an abbey. The topic is Martin’s faith.

Philomena: Do you believe in God, Martin?

Martin : Well, where do you start? I've always thought that was a very difficult question to...give a simple answer to. Do you?

18/MA/OB The setting is in Martin’s car. Philomena is curious about Martin’s faith because she only knows him recently, and it leads her to ask him directly.

Martin, who does not really like to talk about religion, tells her that it is a difficult question to answer, which sounds obscure. He says that to make Philomena understand that he is reluctant to answer her question. Moreover, he also asks her about her faith, which makes his utterance less clear. In other words, he flouts maxim of manner because his answer is obscure.

The dialogue that contains maxim of manner flouting is the dialogue between Martin and Kate below. The topic is Philomena.

Kate : How's Philomena?

Martin: Well, I've finally seen, first hand, what a lifetime's diet of the Reader's Digest, the Daily Mail and romantic fiction can do to a person'sbrain.

26/MA/OB Both of them talk on the phone due to distance. Martin talks to her in his hotel room since he is there to get some rest. Philomena becomes the topic because she comes up in the conversation.

Martin says that he has finally seen that writings from Reader's Digest, the Daily Mail, and romantic fiction can do to a person’s brain to answer his wife’s

question. He says the word ‘a person’, which sounds obscure, to refer to Philomena because he wants to make fun of her. Even though it is not clear, his wife understands

41/QT/ TM

Philomena: And what do you believe in? Picking holes in everyone else and being a smart aleck? Taking photos whenever you like?

Martin: I read a very funny headline in a satirical newspaper the other day, about the earthquake in Turkey. It said, "God outdoes terrorists yet again." Why God feels the need to suddenly wipe out hundreds of thousands of innocent people escapes me. You should ask Him about that while you're in there. He'll probably say He moves in mysterious ways.

✓ Philomena appears more irritated after hearing Martin’s opinion on religion and asks about his belief. Martin tells Philomena a headline which said that It said that God kills more people than terrorists do. He also suggests her that if she should ask Him about the disaster when she is in the confessional to mock her belief, which are not needed by the old lady. In other words, Martin performs a maxim of quantity flouting by giving too much information.

42/RL/ IR

Philomena: And what do you believe in? Picking holes in everyone else and being a smart aleck? Taking photos whenever you like?

Martin: I read a very funny headline in a satirical newspaper the other day, about the earthquake in Turkey. It said, "God outdoes terrorists yet again." Why God feels the need to suddenly wipe out hundreds of thousands of innocent people escapes me. You should ask Him about that while you're in there. He'll probably say He moves in mysterious ways.

✓ Martin is asked by Philomena about his belief since she gets irritated. In lieu of giving a relevant answer, which is his faith, he flouts the maxim of relation by telling her that he read a funny headline about god and mocking her belief to defend his faith.

92   

Code Data Maxim Flouting Context

QT QL RL MA

TL TM HB MT IO BA IR OB 43/QT/

TM

Pete’s personal assistant: I believe you've called before, sir.

Martin: Yes. I've called a couple of times and no one's calling me back. I feel like I'm hitting my head against a brick wall.

✓ In this case, Martin flouts the maxim of quantity because he gives too much information. He could have just said that he has not got any response, yet, he also says that he feels like he is hitting his head against a brick wall, which is unnecessary.

44/RL/ HB

Pete’s personal assistant: I believe you've called before, sir.

Martin: Yes. I've called a couple of times and no one's calling me back. I feel like I'm hitting my head against a brick wall.

✓ Martin tries to contact Pete Olsson by talking to his personal assistant first through phone. He feels frustrated because he has tried to contact Pete a couple of times but has not successful. He describes his frustration by telling her that he is hitting his head against a brick wall, to exaggerate his frustration. In other words he uses hyperbole, a strategy to perform maxim of quality flouting.

45/QT/ TM

Martin: It's probably nothing, but she's very old and Irish.

✓ Martin gets worried because when he knocked

Philomena’s door, he got no response and asks a concierge to help. He says that since she is very old, which sounds reasonable. However, he also flouts the maxim of quantity by saying that she is Irish, which is unnecessary to be told. He says that because Irish people are stereotyped as highly emotional. Therefore can do something extreme such as jumping off the balcony.  

46/RL/ IR

Philomena: You can go on your own! I'm not prepared to go all that way to hear someone else tell me I didn't give two hoots about Anthony and that I abandoned my child and all the rest of it.

Martin: What’s that?

✓ Martin wants to investigate Anthony’s case further in the United States. However, Philomena says that she wants to go back to England because she does not want to hear rants from other people about Anthony. After that, Martin performs a maxim of relation flouting by showing a Celtic Harp picture on a glass to divert Philomena’s attention and to make sure that Philomena knows the instrument.

47/ /RL/IR

Philomena: It's a Celtic harp. So we should go home. I'll mind my own business. I want to watch David Attenborough on television and I'll be happy with that.

Martin: And what’s that?

✓ Philomena keeps showing the persistence of her decision; however, Martin once again performs a maxim of quality flouting to divert her attention, this time by showing a Celtic Harp badge on Anthony’s coat on his picture. He does that to show that Anthony cared about his country of origin when he was still alive.

       

94   

Code Data Maxim Flouting Context

QT QL RL MA

TL TM HB MT IO BA IR OB 48/

RL/IR

Hildegarde: Their suffering was atonement for their sins.

Martin: One of the mothers was 14 years old!

✓ Martin performs a maxim relation flouting because he gives an irrelevant response. Hildegarde tells Martin that the graves of deceased mothers are being treated poorly because she thinks that it is their punishment for having sex outside marriage. Martin points out that the abbey went too far by making a 14-year-old mother’s grave look terrible since he is sure that the mother was treated horribly during her life, given the old nun’s cruel nature.

Total Frequency 2 15 4 3 2 0 19 3 48 Total Percentage

4.

2

31

.2

8.

4

6.

2

4.

2

0 39

.6

6.

2

100